Showing posts with label Independence Referendum. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Independence Referendum. Show all posts
Wednesday, 17 September 2014
David v Goliath
Recently I’ve been commenting on Facebook saying the referendum battle looks more like a David and Goliath situation. The invasion of our masters from London, the dishonest ‘promises’ which will fade into the long grass if a No vote, watching the sickening spectacle of the three Westminster leaders agreeing with each other’s words - I could go on and on.
Unfortunately there has been some incidents locally which cause me to feel ashamed of the odd independence supporter. One happened to me last week in Dundee. I was walking through the city centre with a friend, who is a businessman. He employs people. He was undecided and we’d been talking about that while walking along the Murraygate.
When we were passing a small group of Yes campaigners one youth leapt out of the group straight into our path. He roared in our faces, “Ye’ve goat tae vote Yes, Yes, Yes.” Now I’m not someone who gets easily offended but I don’t like anyone yelling at me two inches from my nose. My friend attempted a conversation. “Why should I vote Yes?” he asked. “‘Cause them in London are cutting oor benefits,” was the reply. The conversation continued and I discovered this young man was 27 years of age, left school at 17 “because I didnae like it” and has never had a job. When asked what kind of job he fancied the reply was, “Ah’m not wantin’ a job. Ah manage fine oan ma benefits and helpin’ ma pal oot wi’ his wee cash jobs now and again”.
When we finally managed to move on, my friend turned to me and said, “It’s a definite No from me now.” Embarrassed, I couldn’t think of an appropriate reply.
I want a fairer country - one in which people are paid a wage equal to the level of their skills and achievements. A country which acknowledges those who take massive risks creating jobs and doesn’t pillory them for making profits. Also, I want to see a country which is fair when spending our taxes on helping those in need. Some would describe the young man we met as ‘vulnerable’ but he certainly was not. He wore quality clothing (I noticed his trainers which cost upwards of £100) and he knew the lifestyle he wanted - one courtesy of the taxpayer.
In an independent Scotland I would hope for a more comprehensive system which stops young people wasting their lives in this way. One suggestion is the return of vocational schools and colleges. All of us have the potential to be good at something and if young people are given the opportunity to learn a trade at a younger age (rather than the one-size-fits-all academic system we have at present), then this young man may have had a different outlook on life. He may have been in work rather than standing on a street on a Thursday afternoon accosting passersby with his silly ‘speech’.
What will tomorrow bring? I’ve become pessimistic in the past few days and can’t quite put my finger on the reason. Maybe its because not one newspaper supports the independence cause and that disappoints me. Maybe it’s the bribery and corruption behind closed doors that sickens me.
Alex Salmond has played his part admirably, along with Patrick Harvie and Denis Canavan to name a few. It’s reported in the press that many people dislike Alex Salmond and that’s why they’re voting No. A rather pathetic reason really because surely Alex Salmond deserves respect for his political skill in handling the aggression of the Westminster army if not his policies.
Often this week I’ve been asked about the result. The polls suggest neck and neck but I’ll stick my neck out and suggest it will be 48-52 against. That is a gut feeling and nothing else. Let’s hope I’m wrong because this is the first and last time I will have a vote on the future of my own country. If it does happen to be a Yes vote, we need to grow up quickly and shake off the entitlement attitude some possess. The old adage ‘a fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work’ would be a good motto for starters.
A few days ago I read an article in which the author stated ‘it was brave to stick together’. I disagreed. Bravery is taking responsibility for your own actions and not depending upon others to make your decisions for you.
There is no doubt in my mind that one day Scotland will return to being an independent nation again. It may not be tomorrow and I won’t be around to see it, but it will happen. Let’s think positive.
Monday, 8 September 2014
Desperate Measures.
click here for the link to Osborne on the
Andrew Marr Show yesterday
Apologies for not posting last week. I was busy with my ‘other’ life although I kept an eye on the media’s efforts to support the No campaign.
Weren’t some of the remarks unbelievably stupid?
Reading some Labour voters comments on various newspaper articles, it appears Scottish Labour voters are more than unhappy with their party for many reasons. The main ones are the loss of social policy, the collusion with the Tories and Libdems and the ineffectiveness of Labour’s Scottish leadership. I’m sure many of you will be muttering, “We could have told you that a while ago.”
Quite a few of these disgruntled Labour voters intend to vote Yes and suddenly up pops Osborne on the Marr Show yesterday stating he’s going to offer us Valhalla with cream on top and a cherry if we’re really good and comply with his wishes. Desperate isn’t it. He won’t be thrilled to read this morning that the Scottish Secretary disagrees with him.
Surely there can’t be a Scot in the land who doesn’t remember - or has heard about - Douglas Home’s 1979 pledge to the Scots that if they vote against devolution he will offer ‘something better’.
The momentum seems to be with the Yes campaign at the moment but Osborne will be hoping to sway the undecided with his feeble coalition offerings in a few days time.
We have to keep positive, keep pleasant and keep the pressure on.
The momentum seems to be with the Yes campaign at the moment but Osborne will be hoping to sway the undecided with his feeble coalition offerings in a few days time.
We have to keep positive, keep pleasant and keep the pressure on.
Monday, 6 January 2014
Monday, 15 October 2012
A Historic Day For Scotland
Salmond and Cameron at Wimbledon Final
Today is being described as 'historic' in some of the media, however one reason I would describe it in that way is because David Cameron has been forced into another 'must keep it as brief as possible because I don't like the place' visit. Another reason is because the signing of the deal signals the start of a 100 week battle over the UK's constitutional future.
The drawn out process of the ballot question has turned many away from the independence debate. Few voters are interested in the political detail and really want to start discussing how Scotland would manage without the support of the rest of the UK.
David Cameron's decision to give Alex Salmond most of what he requested has upset some of his critics. Why is it newspapers tend to quote Michael Forsyth when one is needed in connection with the independence referendum? Maybe he's the only one who answers the telephone to journalists.
Later this week the SNP hold their conference and I'm sure, away from television cameras, some good discussion will take place. One which must be resolved is the matter of campaign spending limits and the Yes campaign must insist the decision is made in Scotland not London. Alex Salmond wants to limit spending by each of the parties to £250,000 in the last four months of the campaign, with the official Yes and No campaigns limited to £750,000 each.
The Electoral Commission propose to allow registered parties to spend up to £1.5m during the last 16 weeks of the campaign, in addition to separate spending by each official referendum campaign based on their vote at the last Scottish elections. This will give the three pro-UK parties of Labour, the Tories and LibDems a significant advantage because they are all London based and have much bigger coffers than any Scotland-only party.
Perhaps Mr Salmond will manage to discuss this unfairness with Mr Cameron today, but if not, then the bias towards the No campaigns has to be seriously questioned.
We now have 100 weeks to discuss Scotland's future. One point I do mention to friends is that it's not up to Alex Salmond or the SNP to state the policies of an independent Scotland. That must be done once the referendum is won and it should be undertaken with consultation with the public.
The past couple of years has seen the SNP provide public consultations to a few of their proposals in the form of online registrations. That style should be included, but I would like to see an independent Scotland return to the face-to-face hustings style as well.
The countdown begins.
Tuesday, 2 October 2012
Nearing The End Of The Beginning - Alex Salmond - 1, David Cameron - 0
Most Sunday papers this weekend suggested David Cameron must be feeling rather smug because, in the final stages of the more than tedious negotiations for the independence referendum, he denied Alex Salmond the right to have a second question on the ballot paper.
The media consensus appears to be Westminster has won the battle of the legal aspects.
I disagree. Alex Salmond has played the game with superior skill in the past months. He had a specific check list and has achieved it all, with the exception of a second question. Some say his determination to include a second question was purely a bargaining tool and one he would be happy to concede if his other requests were granted.
Now Mr Salmond has had the date approved. Mr Cameron is about to hand over the legal power for the referendum and he can introduce legislation for 16 and 17-year-olds to vote. The wording on the ballot paper will be the SNP's preferred wording with amendments made by the Electoral Commission and no interference from Westminster.
The battle over independence has a long way to go but it appears Alex Salmond is winning all the important early contests.
One message anyone who supports independence must broadcast loud and clear is that should result be in the No campaign's favour there will be no changes to the status quo. In fact Westminster could rescind some of the powers already granted to the Scottish Parliament. How do we know that no further powers will be given? Alistair Darling, the heid bummer of the No campaign, told us so last week. If the polls are to be believed, two thirds of people in Scotland will be unhappy with his prediction.
Tuesday, 21 August 2012
Referendum Question Solved
The media is still preoccupied with Julian Assange's latest self-preservation tactic and none, apart from the Scotsman, has reported David Cameron's latest remarks regarding independence for Scotland.
The MP's message was relayed courtesy of 'sources close to the Prime Minister' who warned a substantial increase in financial powers for Holyrood is not an option if Scotland wants to remain within the UK.
The warning, according to Eddie Barnes, appears to rule out both devo-max and other forms of fiscal autonomy.
Only six months ago Mr Cameron, during an infrequent visit to Scotland, assured the electorate that if they voted No in the referendum he 'would look at what further powers could be devolved'. It seems he's now looked and decided none. Few independence supporters will be surprised by this development.
There doesn't seem much point discussing a second question on the ballot paper if the PM is not prepared to offer further devolution rights to Scotland and I suspect this is his way of ensuring the ballot paper holds one question - Yes/No with no alternatives. This may well come back to bite him.
The SNP insist civic Scotland has a desire for further fiscal powers but if the Westminster government now declares it will refuse to acknowledge these wishes, then there is no point in putting the question before the people in 2014.
I've never been comfortable with a 'devo-max' question being included. It's too much of a halfway house which leaves Westminster with majority control over my country.
The Yes campaign must use this latest 'message' from No 10 to achieve a successful Yes vote for independence and make clear to voters how fickle the Westminster government will be if we vote anything else but Yes.
That's the referendum question solved. Let's move on to the financial aspect of independence. The result will depend upon people's belief that they will be better off in an independent Scotland. It's the responsibility of politicians to put the facts on the table.
The moral of this post is: Don't trust Westminster politicians.
Labels:
David Cameron,
Independence Referendum
Friday, 10 February 2012
Sunday, 5 February 2012
Saturday, 4 February 2012
Friday, 13 January 2012
Independence Referendum - A Few Links
I thought I would post a few links relevant to this week's headlines for my overseas readers. Not all reflect my own views but it's only right that all sides of the debate are given equal publicity. If you know of any others, please put the link in the comments.
A generous offer to Scotland could keep the Union safe
London: very cross and not amused
Interviewing Alex Salmond, the man who wants to break up Britain
Salmond fishing
Why Devo Max will be on the ballot.
Only a fool would call the Scottish independence referendum at this distance
The perils of referendums
Referendum - the missing middle way
Clare Galloway (this is a Facebook link and I'm not sure if it is accessible to everyone).
Tuesday, 10 January 2012
Defending The Union Is An Expensive Business
Yesterday another unionist website popped into my radar. The Campaign against Scottish Independence is a more professional looking site than the previous one mentioned and appears to be updated very regularly.
The owner of Unity Scotland was easily traced but with NTSI the operators are adept at hiding the provenance.
Yesterday I posted the following Tweet:
scots_subrosa Subrosa
Another anonymous website asking people for money - The Campaign against Scottish Independence -bit.ly/zniclA
@NTSI_VoteNo
No to Independence
@scots_subrosa indeed - we ask for donations and receive them regularly, and publish our intake and outgoings
Another Tweeter asked:
@NTSI_VoteNo
No to Independence
@scouriebeast no we're not a registered charity
The combination of politics and donations has created problems in recent years and I was hoping - stupidly - that the online Independence Campaign would be free from nasty criticism and open and transparent. Sadly that's not to be and quite probably more and more unionist sites of this type will appear in the coming months.
I have no objection to anyone requesting donations as long as it is clearly stated where the money goes and gives a contact name and address. Nobody would buy products from a website without verifiying it's authenticity would they?
Since the Twitter conversations with NTSI yesterday a Donate page has been added to their site. Membership is from £10 to £30 a month and for the £30 Gold card one of the benefits is 'Member Blog where you can share your thoughts'. What a prize! We need to warn those who are maybe not quite acquainted with the shadier side of the internet, that parting with money without knowing where/to whom it is going, is not a good idea.
Defending the union is an expensive business.
It's also a nasty business. Ali Syme is one of the operators of NTSI and is happy - publicly on Facebook - to verify that the SNP are 'more or less' the Scottish equivalent of the SinnFein/IRA:
- Aidan Work Isn't the S.N.P. supposedly the Scots equivilant to Sinn Fein/I.R.A.?17 December at 12:13
Thanks to @Facepalm for exposing Mr Syme's scurrilous views.
Labels:
Independence Referendum,
unionist websites
Saturday, 7 January 2012
The Independence Debate - Unionist Websites
click to enlarge
On Thursday I came across the above website, 'Unity Scotland'. It calls itself 'a campaign organisation which believes that the future of Scotland and its people is best served by remaining as part of the United Kingdom.'
Obviously the site has been published by the pro-union side of the debate and it's good to know someone is making an effort to attract an online audience. However, after digging a little deeper I found the site does not state who is responsible for it, but mentions 'Unity Scotland therefore is not driven by parliamentarians, but by you'.
By me? Indeed not.
Indignantly I emailed the contact address for further information because the site is asking for people's money, although camouflaged as a 'Friend of Unity Scotland'. In fact there are four standards of Friend - varying from a Red to a Platinum (£15 to £100 a year). If you are foolish enough to send money to an anonymous organisation, you can become a Platinum member and receive a 'free' Unity Scotland golf umbrella which, in reality will cost you £50 - the difference between a Blue and Platinum Friend(ship).
Once I realised this site may not be driven by parliamentarians but was obviously driven by politicians, I decided to ask my Twitter followers if anyone knew the site owner(s). The replies arrived within minutes and thanks to all who answered.
The domain is registered to a Callum Campbell who lives in Bridge of Allan. One respondent was kind enough to mention that 'funnily enough Bridge of Allan has a conservative councillor called Callum Campbell who lives at the same address at that stated on the domain registration'.
It was also mentioned that the site seems to be in need of a bit of an update as there's nothing new in their news items since 6 November. Ah, the enthusiasm of the unionists!
Further information was that the address for the receipt of monies - 1 St Colme Street, Edinburgh - is a suite of offices and my informant says, "it looks like they're renting a desk in order to run a twitter feed and not much else right now."
Mr Campbell is no shrinking violet so why doesn't he state his political allegiance on the Unity Scotland site? Why imply the site is not politically structured when it clearly is?
Sites similar to Unity Scotland will become more plentiful as we go towards the independence referendum date, but I hope others will be more candid. What the people need is open and honest debate. Mr Campbell's site, because of its lack of openness, does his cause no favours. In fact it conveys an aura of sleaze. Of course, not all those in favour of the union will behave in such a manner, will they?
Labels:
Independence Referendum,
unionists,
Unity Scotland
Sunday, 12 June 2011
Unionism and Independence
Last week again the MSM were making the agenda in Scottish politics by continuing to concentrate on the independence referendum and the result of a small poll, which stated support had increased by 6%, sent them into overdrive.
Meantime the Scottish government concentrated on the care of the elderly, job creation and the economy to name but a few national issues. However all the MSM wants to discuss at present is the referendum and I'm sure Alex Salmond is quite content for them to linger as long as they like on this particular issue, as long as they do give some column width to other important proceedings.
Last week the Guardian's Kevin McKenna wrote a rather weird article about Scotland and independence but this week he has redeemed himself somewhat and faced a few home truths.
The Unionists don't know where to turn now that they've realised the people are fully aware the last SNP government did more for Scotland than the Unionists did in 12 years of devolution and for 40 years prior to 1999.
They have to find a counter-argument to the SNP's desire for independence and they've been meeting in non-smoke-filled rooms. It's reported the Tories and Labour want John (now a Lord) Reid to lead the campaign to keep Scotland within the UK. Nothing less than a Lord will do.
Influential figures within the two main UK parties believe that Reid is the "obvious choice" to take on Alex Salmond.
He would be excellent from a nationalist point of view. The Scottish MP Tom Harris refers to his colleague as 'popular and trusted'. That may well be in close Labour circles, but many people in Scotland associate John Reid with the Afghanistan war when he promised, in 2006, that the extra troops he was sending to the conflict would leave again 'without a shot being fired'. Since then over 200 of our armed forces have lost their lives.
They also remember how he augmented his MP's salary by securing a £50,000 job with a private security company - G4S - which operated in Iraq and continues to operate in Afghanistan.
Mr Reid's biggest 'claim to fame' though was when he was Leader of the House of Commons in the immediate aftermath of the decision to invade Iraq and was responsible for swinging support for the invasion among Labour MPs. Throughout the UK millions objected to the then Labour government's invasion of Iraq but their voices were ignored. John Reid was one of the protagonists who steadfastly stood shoulder to shoulder with Tony Blair.
To add to their woes Ed Balls (of all people) is to set up a task-force to fight for Scotland's place in the UK. Will John Reid be heid bummer? Now he's decided to throw in the towel as chairman of Celtic FC, he may well think, with time on his hands, why not. The Unionists' problem is he's the past not the future. Too many older Scottish Labour MPs and ex-MPs carry too much baggage from the Iraq/Blair/Brown era.
A look at Alex Salmond's cabinet shows the SNP are intent on looking and moving forward. Populations like positive, up-beat governance.
Should John Reid head any 'No' campaign I very much doubt if the news would send a meagre ripple throughout the SNP. Nonetheless, Alex Salmond isn't one to become complacent because he knows Labour does have a strong core vote, but as long as he adheres to being honest with the electorate he has little to fear.
Note: In the spirit of fairness - that politically ill-defined buzzword - the Labour party is offering membership to all under 27s for 1p. No conditions appear to be attached but a 'source' informs me that those joining at the special rate and who live outside Scotland must be prepared to travel to Scotland to campaign when required and pay for their own food and accommodation. Travel will be subsidised but a considerable percentage will be charged. Cheap at twice the price!
source
Monday, 30 November 2009
Happy Special St Andrews Day

Happy St Andrews Day. Many events have been taking place throughout Scotland this weekend but today there is also the Big One.
Alex Salmond finally launches the SNP's long awaited White Paper on the country's constitutional future. That will pave the way for a referendum Bill early next year.
The First Minister's aim and intention, if they can get the Bill passed, is for an independence referendum to take place "this time next year."
Mr Murphy, the Scottish Secretary based in Westminster, has accused Scottish independence supporters of being not being patriots and of 'putting their party before Scotland'. What Mr Murphy has to understand is that many SNP voters are not party members but support the policy of independence or at least the fact that the SNP are firm in their intention to ensure everyone has a say in the country's future by proposing a referendum. Remarks like this have no chance of winning over floating voters - quite the contrary.
An opinion poll published yesterday found 50% of people agreed a referendum should be held in a few years' time but it is not a priority at the moment, 25% said they believed a referendum should be held as soon as possible, 20% didn't support a referendum at all and 5% didn't know.
It's common knowledge that the unionist parties will vote against the Bill, but I applaud Alex Salmond for his determination in offering Scots the chance to decide their future.
Happy St Andrews Day and congratulations to the launch of the Big One.
Update: Since publication the Bill has been now been placed on the Scottish Government website.
Labels:
Independence Referendum,
St Andrews Day
Monday, 31 August 2009
Scottish Parliament to Introduce Independence Bill

The Scottish Government confirmed an independence referendum and minimum pricing for alcohol are among the bills to be introduced at the Scottish Parliament in the coming year. Thirteen bills are to be brought forward in the SNP's third legislative session. The programme will be debated by MSPs at Holyrood on Thursday.
Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon said the people of Scotland had a democratic right to have their say on the issue of independence.
The opposition parties gave their predisposed opinions:
Scottish Labour said an independence referendum would destabilise an already faltering economy. Business Manager Michael McMahon said: "Next week's legislative programme is likely to be more notable for what it leaves out than what it includes.
The Tories claimed the Scottish Government was on course to meet fewer than a quarter of key targets, prompting Conservative leader Annabel Goldie to accuse the Nationalists of "failing Scotland".
Liberal Democrat chief whip Mike Rumbles said: "This looks like another SNP legislative programme that isn't worthy of the Scottish Parliament.
The SNP government promised an Independence Bill and kept true to their word.
Before then of course, there is the debate on Wednesday about Megrahi's release and Kenny MacAskill has promised to make all correspondence available to the public. Anyone like to bet there will be at least some redacted documents if not some which the UK government refused permission to publish?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)













